>>> On 9/5/2012 at 12:45 PM, "McKown, John" <john.mck...@healthmarkets.com> >>> wrote:
> I guess that I should preface this with another question. Does anybody use a > z for heavy numeric computation anymore? Or has that all gone to Intel and > Power boxes? Why is that? If it is because the z architecture is "not good" > at numeric computation, I have a question. As has been pointed out in another thread here, the dollar cost per instruction is much higher on System z than other architectures. So for purely computational workloads, although System z may have a faster CPU than the other architectures, it costs more for the same amount of computation. A lot of high performance computing is "restartable" in that if a computation node fails, starting that piece of work over from the beginning isn't hard. Most of the qualities that are built into System z aren't needed for that type of work, so no need to spend the big bucks for it. Mark Post ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
